D&D is like the Imperial System.
It's incredibly prevalent in America, and while it may not be perfect for all use cases, it's extremely useful for day-to-day situations and feels quite natural to those familiar with it. 0 is a very cold day, 100 is a very hot day, and 50 is not quite warm enough for a t-shirt but you're not going to need gloves. An inch is roughly the length of the first bit of your thumb, a foot is...a foot, and a yard is about one step. A cup is a cup, a teaspoon is a teaspoon, and a gallon is a gallon. It's intuitive, easy to use, and while it may not be the best system to use when working with extremes in volume/temperature/etc., it gets the job done in the vast majority of "typical" use cases. And, since you can convert it into other systems, it ultimately does not lack in accuracy. At the end of the day, what system you use to measure with comes down to a matter of preference, and knowing several systems makes it easy to convert from one to the other.
Every other game is like the Metric system.
It's gay.___________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
> American companies using Kilo-(metric) Pounds (imperial)
You even got the part where it is useless unless you homebrew the shit out of it.
Bravo.
How much is fricking 50 feet?
Because I have no clue, and it doesn't tell me anything. Just some abstract number with random word after it.
You probably would feel the same if I told you something is 15 metres.
t. metric user
Ok so this is going to surprise some people. The reason that standardized measurements feel arbitrary to people that aren't used to the is that ALL standards are arbitrarily set by some authority. There is no absolute measurement
>There is no absolute measurement
False. I am an absolute unit.
about 3 feet to a yard would mean about 17 paces
>How much is fricking 50 feet?
>it doesn't tell me anything. Just some abstract number with random word after it.
Your foot is about a foot long. Your stride is about three feet, give or take. So, like
said, 50 feet is around 17 paces. And 17 meters would be around the same distance, since a meter is about 3 feet.
That's the thing about Imperial Measurements - they directly derive from an average human experience. How long is your foot? That's a foot, give or take a bit. How long is a yard? That's a stride, give or take a bit. How long is an inch? That's two ripe barleycorns placed end to end, according to one of the kings named Edward who ruled England a long time ago.
They're weird measurements because they derive from the subjective and sometimes weird nature of human life.
Honestly i don't think the actual units realy matter all that much, it all comes down to what you learn and what you're familiar with this, the rationalization of measurements done by the french revolutionaries when they created the metric system, and to argue this point:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Republican_calendar
The way we divide out a day roughly makes sense, but what would be the functional difference between having 10 days a week, with each day being 10 hour, and each hour being a hundred minutes? Nothing, the fundamental nature of the thing we're measuring hasn't changed, arguing about which of these systems is "more rational" is foolish because at the end of the day it's totally arbitrary, there is no such thing as a meter or a yard, we made them both up, this line of argumentation i've seen for the imperial system "that it just makes sense and uses human scale" seems like a kind of counterpoint to normal attacks by pro-imperial system people that it's inherently more rational for some reason.
I'm like 99% sure that all these arguments have more to do with cultural signifiers that have built up around these things rather than any inherent part of either.
>this line of argumentation i've seen for the imperial system "that it just makes sense and uses human scale" seems like a kind of counterpoint to normal attacks by pro-imperial system people that it's inherently more rational for some reason.
>
>I'm like 99% sure that all these arguments have more to do with cultural signifiers that have built up around these things rather than any inherent part of either.
I work in a field where we use both Imperial and Metric units, and while some of the reasons for using Imperial units are cultural inertia (and backwards compatibility), they're generally good for what I'd call "mid-sized measurements" - stuff you can eyeball. Metric is better for dealing with very small measurements and very large measurements, or in cases where you're going to have to do a bunch of unit conversions.
I guarantee that the only reason imperial units feel easier to eyeball to you is because they are what you are more exposed to. Even after all American height memes online if I saw someone I would have no idea if they were over or under 6 foot but I could easily ballpark how tall they are in cm.
>Nothing, the fundamental nature of the thing we're measuring hasn't changed, arguing about which of these systems is "more rational" is foolish because at the end of the day it's totally arbitrary,
Um anon.. if a day was only 10 hours long that would make a lot less sense to your every day life because there's a solar object we rotate around and can only see in a cyclical nature that our sleep schedules revolve around.
I can't even tell if you're trolling because you're creating some kind of ideal anti-metric argument.
The metric version of a day wouldn't revolve around our day/night cycle and would be based on some obscure universal constant that doesn't match the human experience at all.
It would come across as arbitrary and insane to americans especially, but people in the EU would say that it's more scientific and rational to measure 36 kilo-seconds per day even though the actual length of sunlight and night didn't change at all.
The day/night cycle exists independently of how we measure time and the only reason we view 24 hours in a day as "natural" is because it's the only system we have any real experience with outside of some very imited hypotheticals.
>you've created an ideal anti-metric argument
The argument that i'm making is that these arguments are ultimately pointless, arguments we make about the inherent "usability" or "rationality" of different systems designed to measure the same thing aren't all that important because our attitudes towards what is usable or rational can't objectively be answered and any arguments in favour or against a given system are post-hoc rationalizations, like, calender systems have changed numerous times across history, i normally use imperial measurements in my day to day existence, but that's pretty much soley because it's what i know and see used quite a lot around me, if i had been raised using metric, i'd probably find that more intuitive, i percieve the day as split into 24 hours of 60 minutes each because it's what has been used around me, in a hypothetical world where decimalisation of time was more widely adopted, i'd probably consider having 24 hours in a day as strange as, iunno, pre-decimalised currency.
>because our attitudes towards what is usable or rational can't objectively be answered and any arguments in favour or against a given system are post-hoc rationalizations
I'm mostly just free-streaming thought but you're misunderstanding or perhaps incorrect.
Measurements are not 100% subjective because there are commonalities to the human experience including our cognitive limits on load and digits.
The decimal time chart you posted helps highlights the issue. Human brains do not operate equally as well at all scales regardless of what their attitudes towards those scales are, and they operate worse the more disconnected and distant something is from the intuitive human experience.
There are objective reasons that one is better than the other even if peoples attitudes can still be manipulated in favor of one or the other.
>The day/night cycle exists independently of how we measure time and the only reason we view 24 hours in a day as "natural" is because it's the only system we have any real experience with outside of some very imited hypotheticals.
And the reason we use base 12/base 60 for time is that it is easier to fractionally subdivide into whole units. 12 can be divided into even whole portions of 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 units. 60 expands that with even divisions of 5, 10, 20 and 30 units. 10 can only really be divided into portions of 1, 2 and 5 units with increasing to 100 only expanding with 4, 10, 20, 25 and 50.
A lot of imperial measures are built around use where Standard measures are built more around math. You will often find "metric" countries "reinventing" those practical units. The 500ml "pint" is a good example.
>A lot of imperial measures are built around use where Standard measures are built more around math. You will often find "metric" countries "reinventing" those practical units. The 500ml "pint" is a good example.
But it makes more sense to have a "subjective" or case specific unit (pint) developed from an objective one (metric system) when common usage demands it than to start making subjective units from the start with little to no correlation between them.
At the end of the day is what you said: it's whatever system you've grown with. But I do feel that, similar to language, if the purpose os to convey information as fast, clear and, "logically" possible metric system makes more sense because it's more rational (1 to 10, without the "hiccups" or weird jumps feet, inches and such make) and quick to math with. Imperial feels like adding pronouns to languages: I can understand the idea, but I still feel you're bloating the language and making it harder for everyone for vanity and pride reasons.
It's an anglo thing. Every single anglo-sphere country uses Imperial and metric.
>if the purpose os to convey information as fast, clear and, "logically" possible metric system makes more sense because it's more rational (1 to 10, without the "hiccups" or weird jumps feet, inches and such make) and quick to math with. Imperial feels like adding pronouns to languages: I can understand the idea, but I still feel you're bloating the language and making it harder for everyone for vanity and pride reasons.
There's a lot of the Imperial system that reeks of "it made sense at the time". And that time was a long time ago.
But, while I appreciate the easier conversions and decimal simplicity the metric system offers (and use it in contexts where it makes sense - milligrams are flat-out BETTER than trying to measure drugs with "grains" or other small Imperial units, metric calibers make far more sense and are more convenient to compare, and metric sockets/bolts/etc. are easier to keep straight than "11/16ths" and other crap you get with Imperial measurements), Imperial units have advantages like the fact that even if I don't have a tape measure, I can walk heel-to-toe along a distance and have a decent idea of how many feet it is. Because my feet are about a foot long. ...that's why the unit of measurement is called "a foot", after all.
They've each got their plusses, minuses, and use cases.
Yep, it's not like a system completly replaces the other. Metric is generally better but it's not like imperial is unusable. It just has those moments where metric is better, but don't come of that often on everyday life. And while I dislike imperial system in general, I've become used to "5ft" distances and feel using meters in medieval tabletop feels weird.
But your example is a funny one, because it's the opposite for me: I'm really tall and have gigantic feet, so by the time I'm counting my 4th feet, other people are on their 5th. On the other side, I've become used to 1m long steps due my old job as a lifeguard, so that feels better to me.
But as we discussed, even if we can prove one tool to be better than the other, it's the skill of the artisan that matters.
Yo, OP, me and , we got you your fricking answer: there are moments where one system or the other is better, and "even if we can prove one tool to be better than the other, it's the skill of the artisan that matters".
>calender systems have changed numerous times across history
That's because the lunar cycle is an obvious unit to base the concept of a "month" around (and why that concept and its approximate length popped up independently practically everywhere you could actually see the moon from at night), and the solar cycle is an equally obvious unit to base the concept of a "year" on, but the two don't line up exactly, which was known at least as far back as the ancient Egyptians (which gave us the hilarious legend of Thoth getting the moon god to gamble away some of his light, so Thoth could take it and make the leap days from it - also explaining why the moon isn't shining at full brightness all the time. It's a fun story, and an interesting metaphor for the problems inherent in resolving a lunar and a solar calendar).
Different societies have tried to confront this problem in different ways - some cultures and religions still use a lunar calendar (at least for ceremonial purposes and determining the correct timing for festivals and such), although the globalized world has generally settled on a compromise calendar with leap days (and even leap seconds, for certain high-precision applications) inserted to try to make things work out.
50 feet is 1/6th of a football field, and I don’t mean that fairy shit soccer
if you know a person is roughly six feet tall then fifty feet is about eight persons long. This is really no different than knowing a person is about 1.8 meters and therefore judging how far 15 meters is.
For people familiar with both systems imperial is still used to describe things in everyday life because its scale has more granularity. 0 degrees is super cold, 100 degrees is super hot, who the frick measures their dick size in centimeters. Even European wargames measure shit in inches.
>who the frick measures their dick size in centimeters
Obviously, the person you're replying to and OP. The measurement in inches would be too embarrassing.
I case of temperature I find Celsius makes a lot more sense because the 0-point is at the point between "winter temperature" (it's literally freezing outside) and "not-winter temperature" (the snow is starting to melt), whereas the same point in Farenheit just seem kind of random. It's probably different if you live somewhere where it isn't below freezing half the year.
T can't visualize things in his head
Only one way to find out. Slay 25 enemies, cut their feet and arrange them in line. Be careful, we need human feet or the measurement will be inaccurate, not goblin feet, orc feet or kobold feet.
Weird.Do you think degree Celsius, metre, kilogram, litre aren't useful for day-to-day situations?
Unironically yes.
They're intentionally vague, because they're designed by faceless European agencies of the sort that Soros and BlackRock back to, effectively, take away consumers' knowledge and freedom.
Celsius was a person, and the rest of the metric system predates most conspiracy theories.
Celsius is based on the boiling and freezing point of water, Kelvin is taking the celsius scale and extending it to absolute zero rather than the freezing point of water, Fahrenheit is based originally on the temperature reached when you mix water, ice and salt and let it sit for a bit with 100 (Well 96 degrees) being defined as the body temperature measured poorly of some random schmuck.
Since then Fahrenheit has been redefined to be based on a conversion from Kelvin, meaning Fahrenheit is literally defined by Celsius.
Most metric measures were made up by French Revolutionaries.
>D&D is like the Imperial System.
It's outlived its usefulness but survives on inertia and tradition, with a lot of people who're used to it absolutely refusing to give alternatives a try? Yeah, I can see it.
Calling strictly defined units of measurement 'vague' seems like a pretty weird criticism.
I could be convinced to accept executing murderers, personally, but the fact is that people make mistakes and I think that the possibility of even one person being executed for a crime he was falsely convicted for is enough of a reason to stick to less final form of punishment. There are also cases where there isn't much room for doubt, of course, but still, just no executing people seems like the surest way to make sure that no one is executed unjustly.
This is true. It's pretty ridiculous how often people try to argue that one system of measurement or another is more natural or intuitive, when in fact it's just whatever's the most familiar seems easier and more intuitive than the alternatives.
How much granularity do you need to figure out whether you should wear a jacket or not, though? I make decisions like that just fine based on temperature in Celsius.
Football's the game where you kick a ball-shaped object with your foot.
>just no executing people seems like the surest way to make sure that no one is executed unjustly.
The surest way to prevent all crime would be to execute the entirety of humanity.
I also enjoy Judge Death
Celsius is an excellent temperature system if you are a sentient bag of water.
Is 60% enough?
Not really. All that meat has a completely different standard range of temperature needs.
As opposed to what? A salted bag of water?
It's also excellent when you're a human and to me it's much more intuitive.
It's so weird to me that burgers somehow don't figure out what this
anon said but somehow think that the people living in the rest of the world have problems with using a system they grew up with in day-to-day life.
>It's also excellent when you're a human
Mediocre at best. Mostly useless for humans but propped up by familiarity.
Or sentient sponge.
people are sentients bag of water
We're tubes like worms.
I'm biased because I was raised on Fahrenheit, but I feel like having 180 degrees between "this is where water freezes" and "this is where water boils" is a lot more useful and provides more granularity than only have 100 degrees between them, when I'm trying to figure out whether I'm going to want a jacket today or not.
Decimal points if you want granularity, no one uses them though.
Weird side note, wind chill use to be measured in watts per square meter. Shit was bananas.
I'm always amused when I see a recipe where all the ingredient measurements are written in SI/metric, but all the temperatures are written in Fahrenheit. Fahrenheit is just easier to use for the range of temperatures normal humans deal with.
I wear coats and jackets until it's in the 70s (Fahrenheit), unless I'm doing something strenuous enough that I'll sweat, but part of that is probably because I grew up in a hot & humid climate, and anything in the 60s and below feels a bit chilly to me.
>probably because I grew up in a hot & humid climate
That's a very good point. It's pretty cold up here, so 50°F is comfortable for me, but anything higher than mid-70s and I want to die.
While it has nothing to do with measurement systems, I grew up at a pretty consistent near-equatorial latitude where the seasonal changes in daytime were about half an hour each direction at most, and now I'm living somewhere much farther north, and I've been having a hell of a time dealing with the fact that this place goes from "it's pitch black at 1500 hours" in the winter to "it's still light at 2100 hours, and it'll be light again at 0400 hours, lol!" in the summer. You'd think I would have gotten used to it after a few years here, but nope.
Anything that's d20 based - or worse d100 based - is literally trying to ape the metric system without understanding what the metric system is actually good for.
>D&D is like the Imperial System.
I agree with this statement, although my conclusion is slightly different.
You know, if Earth were a fictional setting, USA would be someone's attempt at postmodern immersion-breaking humor.
> so we have the western half of the world, technologically and ethically superior
> death penalty is outlawed
> except in one country
> everyone uses sensible, math-amendable units of measurement
> except that one country
> science, math, and technology are widely respected for visibly improving everyone's lives
> except in that country where everyone is crazy about wrestling and other sports instead
> also they took the world's most popular ball sport and made their own version by somehow combining it with wrestling
> like half of their people don't even believe in widely-established scientific theories
okay, who even did the lore for this continent? does it belong here?
> also this is the most economically powerful country on the planet and its informal leader
what.
Leaf here. Can use either interchangeably.
WotCDnD is like the metric system. 'new and improved' but largely flavourless and lacking a useful stand in for practical small measurements, looking at you decimeter you awkward as frick to say unit. The imperial system is TSR D&D and earlier. Cludged together through use and time, actually a lot easier, disliked by effeminate eurogays.
You don't make an empire by being nice and reasonable like everyone else.
>implying executing murderers and rapists to remove them from the gene pool isn’t good and based
>implying most of Europe and Latin America doesn’t go apeshit and start riots over fricking football
Personally I’m of the opinion it’s better to let Murderers and rapists rot in prison for the rest of their lives than to risk executing innocent people, but also the death penalty doesn’t actually deter crime.
Do you have any idea how much it costs to care for the murderers and rapists you have rotting in a prison? The issue with that approach is that you end up pouring public funds into taking care of the very people who have most flouted the social contract.
It costs less to imprison them for life than to kill them.
https://www.verifythis.com/amp/article/news/verify/crime-verify/no-the-death-penalty-is-not-cheaper-than-life-imprisonment/536-2ec7c7b1-23e7-497e-85fa-407cb3f2a1f2
>they give them extra free lawyers and scientists
>then leave them in prison for 20 years paying for them the entire time before even trying to execute them so actually executing them is more expensive.
>DEBOONKED
In Fahrenheit terms, your IQ is a pleasant, but still quite chilly day.
I mean, is that something you want? As soon as they get a guilty verdict you just take them out back behind the courthouse and put a bullet in their dead?
Americans lack long term planning by nature because their culture hasn't existed long term. They live on instant gratification, so they think it's a good ide executing everyone they don't like, never thinking that they'd be opening the gates for anyone they don't like to execute them. Why build a society that functions for its people when you can gut it for cash, spend it on blow and die before the consequences catch up to you?
>I think we should execute this guy who raped and murder eight women
>Um, wow, don't you realize this is a slippery slope for someone who disagrees with you to execute you???
This has to be one of the most moronic copes I have ever seen.
I'm sure you'll gladly eat a bullet when you've been wrongfully convicted by your dogshit judicial system. Wouldn't want to inconvenience your overlords.
Yeah, there's a ton of people getting wrongfully convicted of serial murder in the age of DNA evidence. Happens almost everyday here in the Caliphate of Ameristan. God bless the allegiance flag
To be fair, improvements in forensic technology (particularly DNA evidence) have exonerated innocents who should never have been incarcerated in the first place.
Irrelevant, the majority of European countries who have abolished the death penalty still had it in place when many of those wrongfully incarcerated people were sentenced.
Yes, if you add a bunch of unnecessary costs, it costs more. But consider the possibility of not doing that.
If you consider the possibility of letting the government execute anybody with a show trial and no chance of appeal? How conservative.
>the gene pool
Nuke USA.
>WE AMERICANS ARENT SAVAGES THINK ABOUT THE JUNGLEDWELLERS THEY'RE EVEN WORSE
lmaoing @ the Russian-tier whataboutist cope
Compare sportsball riots and death tolls from sportsball riots between the USA, South America, and Europe.
I'm pretty sure the USA come in dead last in that race nobody wants to win.
Wow, you have less injuries/fatalities related to an activity that is far less popular in the US. Now let's look at statistics retaining to children being murdered.
>Now let's look at statistics retaining to children being murdered.
Is this a "I don't understand per capita" schizopost?
>also this is the most economically powerful country on the planet and its informal leader
>what.
Perhaps some of the things you portray as bad and backwards are actually beneficial to a nation.
On the other hand, maybe it's just due to having a vast landmass with most of the natural resources that actually matter united under a single government, which generally stayed out of everybody else's wars for half of its existence, unless its arm was twisted into participating, and didn't have to deal with feudal baggage in setting up its unified government. Europe's historical near-constant conflict and division into a bunch of smaller nations, some of which seem almost incapable of surviving on their own, paradoxically spurred its growth due to the constant arms races in economics, science, diplomacy, and literal arms, but also kneecapped its potential in a fully-globalized economy.
Or, to put it another way, America wouldn't be the 'informal leader' of the world if Kaiser Wilhelm and Adolf Hitler, along with other European politicians/leaders/generals/etc., hadn't managed to spark stunningly massive wars that left swathes of Europe devastated (and utterly wrecked demographics in some countries - "The Lost Generation" isn't a band name, ya know) without touching America. The rest of the "western half of the world, technologically and ethically superior" burned itself to ashes twice, and we yanks got to ...just kinda not have our cities carpet bombed like the other civilized places were all doing to each other, make vast amounts of money (and/or get a lot of IOUs) by selling stuff to the warring parties, come in clutch on the winning side, and gain a ludicrous amount of influence basically because our country hadn't been burnt to the ground and we still had money.
I'm not preaching American exceptionalism here, but what I am saying is that America owes its current global prominence to two massive instances of Europeans trying to kill each other en masse.
This is partially true, but America was well on it's way to superpower status prior to the world wars, basically since the war of 1812, any reasonable chance Europe had to check American expansion had wiltered away, and a lot of migration patterns sort of cemented this, when Europeans got pissed with the extant social order, they had a few options, one popular one was getting the frick out and moving to the place where they're selling land grants for absurdly cheap prices, and good land at that (distinguishing it from Canada, or Australia), with your alternatives being engage in radical politics (good way to get killed) or learn to deal with a pretty fundamentally stacked deck, when settled Americans on the east coast got pissed, the west awaited.
Plus it's worth noting that the idea of American isolationism was only ever semi-true, America took part in the high age of imperialism with enthusiasm, and obviously played favourites in investment in Europe (specifically being the reason that America joined the Entente in world war 1, protecting investments in France and Britain).
Like honestly any narrative about why America is the current hegemon of the planet that doesn't focus on the nearly permanent existence of "the west" as a way of relieving societal tension in an ultimately productive manner is an incomplete one, I'm British and have been all my life but this seems like a key part of my understanding of America, it goes back to one of the big greivances the Founding Fathers had, restrictions on settling westward in order to avoid pissing off Native British allies (something that continued up until the war of 1812), and the times America move closest to European modes of government (specifically talking about social democracy here under FDR) are at times when the frontier is starting to close, and from an outsiders perspective, it seems like a series of bandaids have been applied to a system that was premised on that frontier never closing.
>This is partially true
I was responding to someone saying "USA would be someone's attempt at postmodern immersion-breaking humor" and comparing it unfavorably to the rest of "the western half of the world, technologically and ethically superior". (That second quote is VERY debatable.)
I wasn't going for nuance, just pointing out that a large part of the reason the USA attained its global superpower status in the latter half of the 1900s was because Europeans were killing each other on a grand scale within living memory. It was on the path to power before that, but Europe gutting itself twice within twenty years or so was what really propelled the USA (and the USSR, let's be fair) to the top of the heap as Global Superpowers. And that wasn't something the USA made them do.
Practically everything you're saying is true, but I was trying to call out someone being an idiot.
>it's worth noting that the idea of American isolationism was only ever semi-true, America took part in the high age of imperialism with enthusiasm
The Monroe Doctrine (and other American isolationist stances) were primarily about not getting caught up like a football in European Great Power frick-games again, not a fully isolationist doctrine like Japan pursued for a while.
>from an outsiders perspective, it seems like a series of bandaids have been applied to a system that was premised on that frontier never closing
That's an interesting take, and there's probably some truth in it, but trying to sort it out in a full reply would take me way over the character limit.
As a fellow American here I agree with the assessment that we are how we are due to the surplus of frontier we had. The Yeoman Farmer and its evolution's have been idolized since Jefferson saw it as the ideal.
I like to use the example of Mormonism. In earlier eras without the surplus of land a new religious doctrine, especially one so removed from its orthodoxy would have had to endure the persecution of its neighbors and would of either overwhelm its competition, been destroyed or adapted to coexistence, see the 30 Years War for the biggest example.
However Mormonism when faced with that kind of conflict instead kept moving west till its adherents could carve out a place to develop without said conflict.
This led to a different set of development pressures and allowed Mormonism to carve out a soft power religious state in Utah, complete with influence via social bonds not seen since Catholicism was The Thing, while staying within the Union.
>(and the USSR, let's be fair)
honestly the main thing that allowed the USSR to do this was because a bunch of Nazis managed to hoodwink the Allies into thinking that the USSR was actually a meaningful threat after the Axis were beaten and thus giving the Soviets the breathing room they needed(mostly in the form of them obtaining nuclear weaponry for themselves) to actually become that threat, in a better world Moscow would have been atomized in 1946 and the US would be the only Atomic Power
>the main thing that allowed the USSR to do this was because a bunch of Nazis managed to hoodwink the Allies into thinking that the USSR was actually a meaningful threat after the Axis were beaten
Whatever kind of crack you're smoking, I'd like some, because it's got to be powerful stuff. The USSR was a legitimate threat, having annexed the majority of Eastern Europe up to its half of Germany, and at the time, nuclear bombs were extremely slow to produce, meaning that a hot war with the USSR would have been the same kind of ground-pounding meatgrinder Operation Barbarossa turned into, and there was little support for that among the other Allies.
And no matter how good your propagandists are, it's a bit difficult to turn on a dime and get your populace behind the idea of backstabbing a nation when you've been assiduously pitching "this man is your friend. He fights for freedom" at your people about that nation for years.
Oh, I understand all of this, and if you know your history, American world dominance makes perfect sense. But on the surface, if you know very little, it appears paradoxical. Hence the joke! Burger people are basically Techno-Barbarians of modernity, combining technology and prosperity with some fricked up cultural norms -- at least if you exaggerate enough.
>twisted into participating
>mfw Americans were forced at gunpoint by a country a entire ocean away wich could never threaten them to come to Europe to have their children be shot to death
By the British, yes. I’m glad you understand the evil of the warmongering eternal anglo at last.
Don't frick with America's boats. That's how the majority or our foreign wars start. You'd think everyone would have learned after Tripoli.
>America owes its current global prominence to two massive instances of Europeans trying to kill each other en masse
The USA was already on track to achieve something like that in the absence of the world wars. In The Rise and Fall of The Great Powers, Kennedy gives the economic effect of World War I in the overtake as six years.
>just kinda not have our cities carpet bombed like the other civilized places were all doing to each other
Fat lot of good that did Latin America, or Turkey, or Portugal. Or even Britain, which was less damaged than its continental rivals and yet had an anemic postwar economic experience.
>like half of their people don't even believe in widely-established scientific theories
if this were a real setting for dollary doos you would be the uninformed moron who thinks the point isn't that the odd dog out is in the right.
Imagine sucking the long schlong of science while simultaniously showing abjectly you have no understanding of the scientific process or how said progress was achieved through hundreds of years. Yet at the same time, this isn't because of ignorance, but rather, you where told all of it by scientists, straight up, you just believed one additional absolutely moronic lie. "you are more enlightened and smarter now then all those other scientists who where wrong so we would never trick you"
>> science, math, and technology are widely respected for visibly improving everyone's lives
>> except in that country where everyone is crazy about wrestling and other sports instead
These aren't mutually exclusive, hell, at the top levels of sport, the usage of science, mathematics and technology for nutrition science and what not has direct applicability, i study computer science, a world where i can't see a dude do a tag-team with a spotlight introduced as "GOD" and ram a dude through a table would be a worse one, a world without the Bletchley park museum would be a worse one.
Purely out of interest, what system were you raised using, mainly?
>Purely out of interest, what system were you raised using, mainly?
Imperial units. Although my education in engineering mainly used the SI Standard Metric units (they're a lot easier to use the equations with).
But I do construction and remodeling in America, so I need (and can only buy) 8-foot 2-by-4s, not 2.4-meter 5cm-by-10cm pieces of wood. All the standard sizes and the building codes and suchlike are written in Imperial units, so I kinda just have to use those.
>He said on the American website he uses to discuss American culture
Do you Eurocucks seriously think serial killers shouldn't be executed?
>sensible, math-amendable units of measurement
Base A brainlet spotted. Really the metric system's clinging to an outdated, hard to calculate numeral code is holding the world back, where America is unburdened and thriving by its superior Furlong and Chain based measuring system.
And get everything that you take for granted in the world is because the USA
lingua franca
This is a labored and totured metaphor that makes no fricking sense and you're a moron for making it.
op is like a male prostitute
wotc employees give him lots of money
You can basically do anything in D&D, and I'm tired of pretending you can't. Same goes for any system, it's just fricking numbers.
>50 is not quite warm enough for a t-shirt
The frick? You are talking about Fahrenheit, right? That's perfect weather for a t-shirt, as long as it isn't raining and windy.
d&d isn't easy or intuitive tho, it's a convoluted mess full of stuff that makes no logical sense
the better comparison is storyteller is imperial and gurps is metric
>D&D is like the Imperial System.
It's only used in America, Liberia, and Myanmar?
And unofficially the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada and many other places. Ask a person their weight in Great Britain and they will tell you it in "Stone" an imperial messure that is one step up from pounds.
Don't bother, bongs pretend they don't use imperial the same way they pretend soccer isn't their garbage acronym.
I don't thave an issue with using imperial distance and weight measures along with metric since for the most part they're pretty intuitive and the smaller distance measures fit everyday use (I have no reason to sue miles, though because miles and kilometers are in the same range of length and km is easier to combine with smaller units), and things like cups and teaspoons are commonly used in Europe as well in cooking recepies and the like, but I have never gotten Farenheit. Not only is the conversion between Celsius and Farenheit far more complicated than with the other measurements, the whole system just seems confusing. Celsius is tied to two very intuitive nature phenomena: 0 is when water freezes and 100 is when water boils. If it's below 0 you have freezing temperatures and there's probably going to be snow and ice. If it's above 0 the snow is melting. Up to about 10 degrees above 0 it's kind of cold but not freezing, above that it's warm. 20+ is t-shirt weather. In daily life I would never need to know temperatures so exactly that I'd need a scale from 0 to 100 just for the tempreature range from jacket to t-shirt weather.
Is the decimeter the most useless measurement unit? I don't think I've ever seen anyone use it for anything.
I think its because its awkward to say and with measurements that scale the centimetre works a lot better.
The decameter is weird too.
>Bait hanging this low and so obvious
>It literallly has "Bait" written over it
>Thread not pruned
>homosexuals saturate OP with (You)s
Summer in full force
It's been Eternal September for decades.
Gay ass bait. Sage